LYNX-DEV Lynx for VMS (was Re: source size, source reorganization)

[Klaus Weide]

On Tue, 16 Sep 1997, Foteos Macrides wrote:

> On 9 May 1997 "T.E.Dickey" <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> [Fote:]
> >>       The parent link for that URL has a link for the current, actual
> >> development code.  However, none of the currently active developers are
> >> "VMSers", and no VMSers can be seen on the horizon for becoming active
> >> in Lynx development, so the long-term future of Lynx on VMS presently is
> >> unclear.
> 
> On Tue, 16 Sep 1997 "T.E.Dickey" <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> [Fote:]
> >> .com and .mms files, or via direct editing of HTFTP.c.  No effort
> >> has been made to keep the .com and .mms files updated in the devel
> >> code, so the NOPORT matter is a relatively minor issue as far as
> >> VMS is concerned, i.e., relative to other needs for VMS to continue
> >> being one of the supported platforms.
> 
>       The devel code has not been able to build on VMS for much more
> than a couple of months.  That's why, after I ended up releasing on
> April 4, as v2.7.1, what I had intended to be just personal mods made
> available to the currently active Lynx developers for possible inclusion
> in the actual development code, I also posted another message that VMSers
> with programming skills should become active in Lynx development if Lynx
> is to remain ported to VMS.  I suppose the persistent inability to build
> the devel code on VMS is a form of stability. :)

Well I guess it is high time to repeat your wakeup call to VMS users.

I was not aware that the devel code does not build on VMS.  Sure, I was
suspecting that few VMS users were trying the devel code (going by
messages to the list), but didn't know that "few" meant "nobody except for
Fote".

I understand that Fote doesn't want to (continue to) be the only person to
take care of the needs of Lynx-for-VMS.  I am still surprised that he
didn't raise this topic (devel code doesn't build) earlier, or at least
(in case he did and I missed it) more visibly.  Anyway, what broke it for
VMS?  Is it "only" the change of symbols in connection with auto config,
or also something else?  What needs to be done?

[ snipped other things I agree with, including quote from Henry's message]

>       As in years gone by, I've continued to check out any mods or
> enhancements I make in the Lynx code on Unix guest accounts, so that
> as far as I know lynx2-7-1+fotemods builds on both VMS and the supported
> flavors of Unix, and Klaus has been incorporating the fotemods into the
> devel code, but I suspect Klaus is not in a position to keep the entirety
> of the devel code ported to VMS, nor Wayne, nor Jim.  

Right (at least for me), I have no way to test building for VMS.
The *.com and *.mms files in the devel code are identical to those in
fotemods.  I.e. we have incorporated Fote's changes to those files (to get
chartrans working, maybe others), but beyond that (and _trying_ not to
break anything in the *.c code for VMS), I don't know what else is needed.

> So unless people
> with substantive experience developing on VMS and an earnest concern
> about keeping Lynx ported to that platform join the ranks of "currently
> active Lynx developers", VMSers would be wise to recognize that the
> future of Lynx on VMS is still unclear.

And even without that, some "currently active testers of the (development)
code for VMS" would be better than nothing.


     Klaus

;
; To UNSUBSCRIBE:  Send a mail message to address@hidden
;                  with "unsubscribe lynx-dev" (without the
;                  quotation marks) on a line by itself.
;